Based on a recent discussion, I wanted to take a look at the top artist overall party... it's changed quite a bit since 2011. All the bandwagon/superficial U2 fans have left/got too old to use the internet anymore... they were ranked 11th overall . Other big drops too. Other celebrations is we have non-rock artists in the top 40. (although Miles was always there) But anyway... I digress...

So what's your top 40? Rules are you first erase the ones who don't deserve to be in the top 40 at all and replace them with the next ones in line. I'll give an example below.

My Deletions:
1 The Beatles
2 Radiohead
3 Pink Floyd
4 David Bowie (Del... I know it's sacrelige but I've really struggled to LOVE his music... always been a respecter from afar, as much as I liked Blackstar and The Man Who Sold the World as well as a few singles)
5 Bob Dylan
6 Led Zeppelin
7 Arcade Fire
8 The Rolling Stones
9 The Velvet Underground
10 Nirvana
11 The Smiths (Man... try as I might, the clever lyrics don't save this music from being less than great in my book)
12 Kendrick Lamar
13 Neil Young
14 Pixies
15 The Beach Boys
16 Miles Davis
17 Kanye West
18 Bruce Springsteen (Dude is boring as hell)
19 The Who (I just can't really get into more than a few songs - just really boring)
20 R.E.M.
21 U2
22 The Clash
23 Jimi Hendrix
24 The Doors
25 Talking Heads
26 King Crimson (Good, but not top 40 material)
27 Sufjan Stevens (Good, but not top 40 material/only really dig one album)
28 Neutral Milk Hotel (Good, but not top 40 material/really only a one hit album imo - great album, but really best artist with a great discography?)
29 The Cure
30 Joy Division (Good, but not top 40 material)
31 The Strokes (Good, but not top 40 material)
32 Arctic Monkeys (Good, but not top 40 material)
33 The Smashing Pumpkins (?)
34 My Bloody Valentine
35 Fleetwood Mac (Good, but not top 40 material)
36 Metallica
37 Black Sabbath
38 Oasis (good lord, how are they not in the bottom 10,000?)
39 Weezer (?)
40 Genesis (About as boring as The Who)

Next 10 artists too far out of reach (but would likely make my top 50 from the site lists order), but really terribly low ranking imo: (artists with significant discography/cultural/historical impact):

Adding 4 more because the more I think about it, I'm not convinced of those I have (?) around... hunting...
Sly and the Family Stone for sure (interestingly enough represented just as Sly Stone, but when you drill in it's both - child acts and the such I'm sure)

I like this thread idea. I think you need to make the deletions a bit clearer as they are the interesting bit.

Also, seems like you were deleting Bowie but then he is on your final
list

I'd also be interested in a supplemanty bonus deletion after the new entries are in (so you can take out any new entry that is truly annoying) with one free pass then for any artist of your choosing to enter in at 40 (just an idea )

Edit: I see you continued to allow deletions for the next 10 artists (i.e. just go through the next 30 or so artists and skip the ones you don't like). That makes sense now so my ideas are not needed._________________I've got these arms and legs that flip flop, flip flop

Looking back I could have got rid of more from the original top 40-but I think this is just about my top 40 from thinning down BEA's top 100._________________I've got these arms and legs that flip flop, flip flop

I think I cheated because I had to roll back quite a ways to pick up those last three. Were we only supposed to grab the next artist better than our deletion? Cause I scrolled with a little bit of intent....

Some justifications:

03 Pink Floyd | Björk | I felt a little guilty deleting some of these, knowing full well that some of these artists were my top 5 a decade ago, but I've moved well past that. I came close to removing The Beatles, but I couldn't quite justify that, even if I haven't listened to a Beatles' record in longer than I can remember. Pink Floyd... a decent jam band. A bit over-indulgent. Certainly a top 500 group, but they don't crack my top 40. Bjork is legitimately one of my top five favorite artists.

04 David Bowie | Pearl Jam | I love Blackstar, but past that, he hasn't done a whole lot I can't live without. Pearl Jam is a band I've grown up with.

06 Led Zeppelin | Sonic Youth | Like Pink Floyd, there was a time I was really into Led, and I still think they're a great band that I don't ever want to hear again, especially Stairway. Sonic Youth is so gritty and twisted that I can never get enough of them.

07 Arcade Fire | Prince | I'm not sure how Arcade Fire is in the top ten. They had one great album, after which, they supplemented their lack of musicianship with more and more musicians. When that stopped working, they turned to a producer I've always found rather irritating, and the wheels continued falling off the wagon. I love that first EP. I love Funeral. Black Mirror is decent. That track Cold Wind, which has faded into obscurity, is absolutely beautiful. But after that, they've become this bloating monster I can't bear to look at. Prince is an icon.

08 The Rolling Stones | John Coltrane | I've never been able to get into the Rolling Stones... any of it. And that might be in part because I heard all those copycats that followed them long before trying to listen to their music (Oasis, Jet, et al). John Coltrane was one of the most innovative musicians of his time.

10 Nirvana | Kate Bush | I'm not going to bother trying to justify this substitution except to say that I did this for me.

15 The Beach Boys | Modest Mouse | The original Arcade Fire. They've got one album that is absolute fire, and after that, they dropped off hard. It doesn't help that Mike Love is kind of an asshole.

18 Bruce Springsteen | Stevie Wonder | I've never gotten the love for Bruce. At his prime, Stevie Wonder was one of the greatest songwriters of all time.

19 The Who | Animal Collective | I'm not sure why I feel Animal Collective belongs here. I think that they had a run of three albums that changed the game, even if they haven't aged well. The Who are alright.

26 King Crimson | Michael Jackson | King Crimson are a mixed bag for me. Respectable, but kind of too much and not enough all at once. Michael Jackson doesn't need an introduction.

27 Sufjan Stevens | Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds | I could almost justify keeping Sufjan on the back of Carrie & Lowell alone, but his body of work outside of that doesn't do much for me.

28 Neutral Milk Hotel | Charles Mingus | The onslaught of alliteration and talk of semin mountaintops is charming, but it's not enough for a top 40 nomination for me. Like Arcade Fire, the Beach Boys, and Sufjan Stevens, there's not much I'm into outside one album.

33 The Smashing Pumpkins | Portishead | The Egging Houses are a decent band with pretty songs. Billy Corgan gets on my nerves, but I'm plucking this one for not having any real impact on me over the years. I find Portishead particularly inspiring.

34 My Bloody Valentine | Can | The Thief changed my life.

35 Fleetwood Mac | Leonard Cohen | Leonard Cohen's name is right next to Dylan's.

Exactly... thanks for catching on. I was worried I did a glavin on the explanation. I think you guys did a way better job than I did... hehe.

And yeah that's ok to cheat a little. What I didn't want to have happen is well let's just replace the top 40 with whoever I want. If that were the case it'd be who are your top 40 artists, so just trying to avoid that. But yeah if you had to dig deep for your 40th, that's ok. Sometimes it feels like a lot of chaff.

And doh! I'll fix my mistake with Bowie. It hurts me to do so but it's just true for me - hurts because I know he earned that spot for sure on many fronts.

Oh also find it interesting there's a decent amount of overlap on the possibly "overrated" Neutral Milk Hotel, The Who, King Crimson, Sufjan, The Strokes, Arctic Monkeys, Oasis, Genesis, and also teetering (at least for two of us with Craola directly dismissing) on the Weezer/Smashing Pumpkins realm for us all (If I can read... )

I liked Craola's take enough and the discussion of the deletions being more interesting that here's my go at explaining away sometimes a crime.

RoundTheBend wrote:

My Deletions:
4 David Bowie
I know it's sacrilege but I've really struggled to LOVE his music... always been a respecter from afar, as much as I liked Blackstar and The Man Who Sold the World as well as a few singles. My sister constantly tried to get me to love Bowie as much as well as some friends and peer pressure of the "in the know" music fans, but reality is when I put on half of his records I'm like WTF. One thing I admire of Bowie (as I do Bob Dylan) is they both just didn't give a shit what people thought. Like they did their thing and if it worked it worked and if didn't, they weren't afraid to fail at all. The difference on why Bob is still there fore me is he had at least 5 albums I really like and for Bowie it's like 2 I mostly like and actually kinda have a beef with those two. Celebrating the queer aspect of Bowie or just the million faces I'll say of Bowie for sure - and musically it's not bad at all either, I just can't relate. I'm Afraid of Americans is probably one of my favorite deeper cuts of his and how he's woven through the history of rock. The creepiest thing on earth is his duet with Bing Crosby. Then I love his duet with Mick Jagger on a mutual Motown favorite of Dancing in the Street. So yeah - mad respect from afar, but just haven't been able to love.

11 The Smiths (Man... try as I might, the clever lyrics don't save this music from being less than great in my book)
I find this band insufferable. Sorry. I feel like the music and the vocals rarely match - it's like they recorded a vocalist from a different band and then a band not related to the vocalist and then superimposed it/forced it to match half the time. Now for 10% of their work it's freaking awesome and the other 90%. Also keep in mind that the clever lyrics are lost on me as that's the last thing I care about. I just feel like half the stuff he sings about anyway aren't really anything I care about either. So yeah the guitarist is pretty alright and the mix on the Queen is pretty great between the drums and bass. Don't get me wrong it's not all bad either - it's just a drag to listen to for me. And you'll probably even think less of me when I say How Soon is Now? is their best song because you probably think I haven't listened to their entire discography desperately trying to understand why this band is rated so highly when I think so poorly of them. Probably 5-8 songs of theirs I'd choose to listen to (which isn't even a full album) with pleasure. The rest is near pain for me.

18 Bruce Springsteen (Dude is boring as hell)
It's funny. Bono talks about how awesome his live energy is and I just don't get it. The heartland thing kinda makes me wanna barf sometimes too. My favorite past time is to make fun of hillbillies, so to commiserate is difficult. Having said all this, the two tracks of Philadelphia and I'm on Fire are... well on fire.

19 The Who (I just can't really get into more than a few songs - just really boring)
They have some singles worth listening to I suppose and Baba O Reily is pretty rad, but by and large this is the band I think of when I hear that prejudiced term "dad" rock... it's just so boring and predictable and sonically less interesting than anything else in the top 40. I suppose they popularized "loud" music (but I think Jimi Hendrix really did too with him playing live on like 8 marshall amps at the same time)... idk I just can't really say the did anything of interest to me except a couple of rock songs that get lost in the mix real easy.

26 King Crimson (Good, but not top 40 material)
Ok so I could see them being in somebody's top 40... but not mine. It's respectable music and all and does represent prog rock better than Pink Floyd imo (I see Pink Floyd as much as hippie music as much as prog rock). Thing is, I'm not a fan of prog rock. But yes, they have a few good to arguably great albums and that's the other thing is the wrote pretty consistent/worth listening to all the way through albums unlike a LOT of prog rock bands. But no... I don't chose (usually) to put anything on they ever released unless it's for science... hehe.

27 Sufjan Stevens (Good, but not top 40 material/only really dig one album)
I know others are sucked into a number of his albums and really in the 2010s I feel like a lot of people respected him, but I only really fell in love with Illinoise. I also have this odd superficial feeling when I listen to some of the music here. It doesn't cut like fantastic art most times. It cuts more like imitation than origination. That's probably not fair, but that's how it feels to me and feelings are often wrong logically.

28 Neutral Milk Hotel (Good, but not top 40 material/really only a one hit album imo - great album, but really best artist with a great discography?)
It could be an exposure thing as I haven't listened to the rest of the discography here, but it feels like this is here because if you are a pitchfork monkey, then you listen to this record and put it on your list and that's why it's so high. Having said that, it's a great record, no doubt. I enjoy listening to it for sure, but it feels like someone like Bjork or Joanna Newsom or even Fionna Apple have put out not only one record on par, but multiple ones. This artist is arguably in the top 40 because of Pitchfork fanboys.

30 Joy Division (Good, but not top 40 material)
I struggle to get into these monotone vocals. I have cathartic moments with deeply depressing music and yet none of this really feels that way to me somehow. I don't connect at all. Musically it isn't intriguing to me.

31 The Strokes (Good, but not top 40 material)
Another one album wonder - the rest of this material is pretty subpar and when they first came out I was pretty pissed they basically stole American Girl from Tom Petty.

32 Arctic Monkeys (Good, but not top 40 material)
Jangle/clever shit that basically is a British early green day - no real substance and no American Idiot to make you potentially rethink them as just another "pop punk band"... I know nobody who takes this band half seriously will agree with that genre label but really that's how I hear half their stuff. Neo-psychedelia... hahahaha oh that's a stretch if you ask me.

33 The Smashing Pumpkins (?)
Time hasn't been kind to this band who dominated the 90s with Siamese Dream and The Infinite Sadness. I mean there were plenty of cultural references to them in the late 90s and then bam. dead fish. Billy Corgan being an asshole and then WTF with the WWF, but then he's like anti-hipster mr. hipster... idk I think people just got sick of his shit. But then there's deep cuts like Pisces Iscariot or whatever and a span of albums that matter to me for most of their "first" career. Sometimes lyrically incredibly powerful. Often tonally amazing. One of the few guitar solos I actually find emotionally powerful instead of wankery. I have mixed feelings of this band for sure. Their comeback was a joke and still is (although Teargarden for Kaleidescope was a more low key thing I got into for a bit).

34 My Bloody Valentine
While Loveless is classic/tonally amazing, I also feel like this is a bit of a one album wonder band/pitchfork wankery and for me, a great artist has a great career/massive impact culturally. They feel much more like a subtle web of influence a la "new historicism".

35 Fleetwood Mac (Good, but not top 40 material)
My gut reaction to this is soft rock is garbage... which is wrong of me to think, but that's my initial reaction. It's kinda what moms listened to or something lame like this, and I can't get that out of my mind, even if their debut sounds nothing like Tusk or whatevs. Sometimes I enjoy this and sometimes I'm like WTF garbage is this - can get boring and really isn't anything that interesting. White people music at it's worst probably is the best way to put this.

36 Metallica
Ok so Metallica is not a band I'd listen to because my heart pulls for it. BUT Metallica, Mötörhead, and Black Sabbath are easily the metal bands I do go to when I'm rarely in a metal mood. I do like some of their stuff and think their best record is probably Master of Puppets and then their self titled record is pretty iconic from a cultural history perspective even if "true" fans mark that as when they sold out. Like David Bowie, I feel they totally deserve the spot in the top 40 artists for the genre the represent and for them being a pillar of that genre, but no, I don't think they are my top 40 choice.

37 Black Sabbath
While their first two records are iconic, I double checked myself on here... no I don't think they are deserving of this spot. I remember Taylor Hawkins of the Foo Fighters answering the question of what he thought of Black Sabbath and his reply was, they are the ugly cousin to Led Zeppelin. I'm not crazy about Led Zeppelin's music other than some stuff overall, but I will say their musicianship and at least 3 albums worth of songwriting is some of the best in rock history. I can't say that of Black Sabbath, but I can thank them for bringing a real doom sound to music - like it's dark and real and believable. Most metal bands make me laugh at their attempt to be scary. Black Sabbath is a little more like, oh shit - I feel the medieval in this (crediting lead singer dude I can't think of name right now as actually respected in the musicology world in his studies/understanding of medieval music).

38 Oasis (good lord, how are they not in the bottom 10,000?)
Ok - I just feel like this stuff is the Backstreet Boys in sheeps clothing. I just can't take any of this for real somehow. I know it was like this come back to rock or something for those on the other side of the pond, but for me this brit pop movement... ugh... I'm going to save myself from embarassment and respect others.

39 Weezer (?)
Yeah - that nerd rock/dork feel is what is kinda groovy about Weezer, but understandably can feel weird or icky. And in their later years it's just utter shit. Like Oasis is better than Hurley or that other album. And no I don't think the White Album was a return. Their last good album was the Red album. RGB and pinkerton are worth listening to again, but the rest I could never listen to again and be perfectly fine.

40 Genesis (About as boring as The Who)
I just don't do prog. It gets stale real quick for me. I mean Peter Gabriel and the other dude I don't care to remember right now are great musicians and all. I think Bono and The Edge were at a pub accepting a reward from one of them and were like openly dogging on them on live TV... dunno if they were just drunk or what, but it was a bit uncomfortable to watch... haha. I've listened to a few of their albums and have nothing memorable I can report on other than I made it through and never want to go back.

18 Bruce Springsteen (Dude is boring as hell)
It's funny. Bono talks about how awesome his live energy is and I just don't get it. The heartland thing kinda makes me wanna barf sometimes too. My favorite past time is to make fun of hillbillies, so to commiserate is difficult. Having said all this, the two tracks of Philadelphia and I'm on Fire are... well on fire.

Get a better pastime and stop being classist.

RoundTheBend wrote:

34 My Bloody Valentine
While Loveless is classic/tonally amazing, I also feel like this is a bit of a one album wonder band/pitchfork wankery and for me, a great artist has a great career/massive impact culturally. They feel much more like a subtle web of influence a la "new historicism".

What the hell is that supposed to mean? And one-album wonder? They have an excellent discography to dig into. Check this out if you haven't yet:

35 Fleetwood Mac (Good, but not top 40 material)
My gut reaction to this is soft rock is garbage... which is wrong of me to think, but that's my initial reaction. It's kinda what moms listened to or something lame like this, and I can't get that out of my mind, even if their debut sounds nothing like Tusk or whatevs. Sometimes I enjoy this and sometimes I'm like WTF garbage is this - can get boring and really isn't anything that interesting. White people music at it's worst probably is the best way to put this.

Someone forgot to drink his respect women juice this morning._________________Add me on RYM

I mean, I'd really like to get rid of the Beatles.... but is what comes up next going to be any better? If I'm understanding the concept here, I need to be judicious about deletions as what comes next being a requirement for entry means that unless I truly dislike an artist, the replacement might not be an upgrade.